Sunday, November 26, 2006
Energy-saving strategies in fluid handling systems
Where to look for wasted power, and how to get it back, a discussion article by David Spitzer, in particular relating to fluid flow, flow control, and pumping systems
People and events throughout the world are interrelated as never before. Technical developments in far-off places can have dramatic effects here at home. Fluid handling systems may seem independent, but a malfunctioning system may affect the bottom line of a major corporation.
Inefficient fluid handling system operation can cause a distant power plant to generate more electricity.
The plant might then emit more greenhouse gases and potentially increase global warming that might affect us all.
Or it might trip off and cause a major outage.
Fluid handling systems are generally composed of mechanical equipment that generates hydraulic energy for a process that consumes that energy.
The fundamental strategies to improve the efficiency of fluid handling systems are to reduce (or eliminate) the need for the hydraulic energy, to generate useful hydraulic energy more efficiently, or to use the process to produce useful energy.
The control engineer may or may not have direct responsibility for implementing these strategies, but his ability to influence the implementation of these strategies should not be underestimated.
Pay Attention to the Process.
Reducing the need for hydraulic energy often entails a technical analysis of the process, which results in beneficial process changes.
Control engineers are often ill prepared to perform this analysis because their training and experience lie in other areas.
However, they can influence the decisions of others by simply asking thought-provoking questions.
* Can we eliminate the pump by locating the vessel upstairs and feed using gravity?
This would free up space and allow us to - ?
* Chilled water is used to cool a liquid to keep the flowmeter operational, but if we use a different flowmeter, which does not require cooling the fluid, then we can reduce the size of the chiller and - ?
* What is the maximum load required by the process?
* Is the equipment oversized?
* Smaller equipment would occupy less space, be less expensive, and cost less to operate.
* Can the fluid be obtained from another fluid handling system and eliminate the need for this equipment?
* That would simplify the process and make space for - ?
Most of the benefits cited in the above examples are not energy savings.
Instead, they represent a win-win situation where the need for hydraulic energy is reduced, so energy costs are reduced.
As a byproduct, the process and/or installation is improved.
Reducing or eliminating the need for hydraulic energy offers one of the best strategies to reduce energy costs, but it usually requires pragmatic insight into the process and utility operation.
People and events throughout the world are interrelated as never before. Technical developments in far-off places can have dramatic effects here at home. Fluid handling systems may seem independent, but a malfunctioning system may affect the bottom line of a major corporation.
Inefficient fluid handling system operation can cause a distant power plant to generate more electricity.
The plant might then emit more greenhouse gases and potentially increase global warming that might affect us all.
Or it might trip off and cause a major outage.
Fluid handling systems are generally composed of mechanical equipment that generates hydraulic energy for a process that consumes that energy.
The fundamental strategies to improve the efficiency of fluid handling systems are to reduce (or eliminate) the need for the hydraulic energy, to generate useful hydraulic energy more efficiently, or to use the process to produce useful energy.
The control engineer may or may not have direct responsibility for implementing these strategies, but his ability to influence the implementation of these strategies should not be underestimated.
Pay Attention to the Process.
Reducing the need for hydraulic energy often entails a technical analysis of the process, which results in beneficial process changes.
Control engineers are often ill prepared to perform this analysis because their training and experience lie in other areas.
However, they can influence the decisions of others by simply asking thought-provoking questions.
* Can we eliminate the pump by locating the vessel upstairs and feed using gravity?
This would free up space and allow us to - ?
* Chilled water is used to cool a liquid to keep the flowmeter operational, but if we use a different flowmeter, which does not require cooling the fluid, then we can reduce the size of the chiller and - ?
* What is the maximum load required by the process?
* Is the equipment oversized?
* Smaller equipment would occupy less space, be less expensive, and cost less to operate.
* Can the fluid be obtained from another fluid handling system and eliminate the need for this equipment?
* That would simplify the process and make space for - ?
Most of the benefits cited in the above examples are not energy savings.
Instead, they represent a win-win situation where the need for hydraulic energy is reduced, so energy costs are reduced.
As a byproduct, the process and/or installation is improved.
Reducing or eliminating the need for hydraulic energy offers one of the best strategies to reduce energy costs, but it usually requires pragmatic insight into the process and utility operation.
# posted by Medical Information : 2:32 AM
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]
